at&t takes high-school graduates and gives them graduate training, and only one- third are functional when they finish high school. two-thirds of those that graduate require remedial training at work or education in college. host: the new report we have been joined by marguerite kondracke, president and ceo of the american promise alliance. as marguerite kondracke mentioned, this is the beginning of a three day summit here in washington, d.c. you can find out more information at their website.

thank you to you for joining us this morning on "washington journal." we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern time. have a good day. ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] first >> it was one year ago this week that president thomas signed the health care bill into law. this afternoon, the cato institute look at responses to the health care lawsons' then, including its effect on the health-care industry, legal challenges, and new opposition. live coverage of that starts today at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c- span2.

president obama is continuing his visit to latin america this week. today, he will be speaking in santiago, chile on relations between the u.s. and the region to live coverage of that starts at 3:20 p.m. this afternoon year on c-span. >> tonight on c-span, marking the eighth anniversary of the department of homeland security with former secretary tom ridge and michael chertoff. and current secretary janet napolitano. they discuss the nature of threats facing didn't country, the structure of the agency, and what they miss most about the job. >> people have asked me, do i miss being secretary, and to a certain extent, i say yes, i miss working with the people that i became do trust, respect, and in my ear because of their hard work. particularly in the early months and years. it was very intense but an exciting time. you enjoy what you're doing with a great cause associated. and it is not knowing. not that everything we read

every morning was something you would want to run home and talk to the family and kids about. but you do miss not knowing. >> they discussed the department of homeland security tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> c-span sat down last week with potential gop 2012 presidential candidate herman cain. it talks about why he is likely to enter the race, the obama administration, his business career with coca-cola and pillsbury, and his failed 2004 senate bid and lessons learned. this is about 45 minutes. >> my parents were able to

pursue their american dreams, and they were able to achieve them. quite simply, they wanted to own a whole house to turn it into a home. we grew up in half a house. my parents cannot afford to buy an entire home. but that was one of their dreams, and they achieved it. they wanted to see their two sons get a better education in order to get a little bit of a better start in life, and we did. i graduated from morehouse college in 1967, and my brother eventually graduated from morris brown college. we were able to achieve our american dream is based upon our own individual aspirations, motivations, and determinations. so my grandkids, i do not believe they're going to have that opportunity because of the changes that are happening in this country. >> such as? >> such as too much legislation shoved down the throats of the

american people. too much regulation. the regulations of the epa where we need some regulations, they are strangling the development of energy from our own resources in this country. and it too much taxation. we need to pay taxes in order to pay for the things that the federal government should do. but we are paying too much in taxes. because the tax code is being manipulated by some of the politicians to select winners and losers. i believe consumers should make those choices, and ultimately what i would like to see is to replace the tax code with the fair tax, which is a national consumption tax. all of these constraints on our lives, businesses, and individuals are making it much more difficult for my grandchildren, your kids and grandkids, to achieve their american dream.

i was just over at the heritage foundation, and they shared with me their economic freedom index reports for 2011. i was startled when that they showed me that in 2009, the united states of america ranked sixth in the world. not even first, but we were sixth. in 2010, we dropped to eighth. and in 2011, we dropped to ninth. because of the attack of all of the regulatory and tax stuff that is being imposed upon businesses and individuals, in that think that that is going to strangle the ability of our children and our grandchildren to pursue those dreams. i believe i'm the old adage that we all have to use our individual talents and skills to do what we can do to try to

write things. >> when one reads about a herman cain candidacy, people love the city have never held elective office. >> yes. >> if you go back in history from abraham lincoln through today, only two presidents did not hold elective office. but for military generals. brand and eisenhower. so what makes you qualified? >> i will be the third one to have not held office. in the first one to have not held office and not have been in the military. but i respond to that by saying to people, most of the people in washington, d.c., have held political office. how is that working for you? what i sense from the american people, because of the many town hall meetings and rallies that i do, they really do not care that i have not held public office. what they see in me is a problem-solver in did not a politician. when i put that on the table when i am talking to groups and i do this constantly to get my

name out there from people that are grass-roots level people, and i say, well, you know i have never held public office -- i get applause. because they really are sick and tired of people who have held public office thinking that that is the primary requirement that people are looking for. the political landscape and the political dynamics of change in the last two years. we saw it on november 2. and i happen to believe that we're going to see it again in november 2012. it is because of these changing dynamics that gives herman cain herman cain a chance to get the nomination to become president. >> you did run for elective office. you came in second in the georgia senate race -- race. what did you learn from losing? >> i did lose. it was an impressive second. coming from within two percentage points against a six- year congressman. and i did beat the 12 your congressman.

two lessons to learn. if i were to run for office again, i would start early and hire good people earlier. the representative defeated me in that republican primary lee -- primary primarily because his campaign had been affected a full year before i could get mine off the ground. i had to go through three campaign managers before i found one that i had confidence in. so i was fully a year behind by the time i finally got a campaign manager, finally got the campaign going, and during that time, the representative was getting commitments in terms of money from a lot of people. he was getting commitments from organizations. his name id was already very high. in a short time span, i was able to get my name i.d. from zero statewide to 50%. if i had started earlier, who knows that that would have turned out. >> we're going to talk about the

policy of this campaign and the republican party. first, let me ask about the strategy what is your approach to this in a field with a lot of former elected officials like mitt romney entomology and others to be considered? >> first of all, focus on the early primary states. secondly, continue to build the ground game that we have developed over the past couple of years, and i was that developing it on purpose for the purposes of running for president. what i mean by that is -- let me use a football analogy. it seems to have a strong running game, but maybe they do not have a strong passing game 60 more often than teams that have a strong passing game and a very weak running game. we're developing a strong ground game, as i call it, because of the natural affiliation that i have had with national organizations for years.

i am the former president and ceo of the national restaurant association, former chairman of the board. i have worked with americans for prosperity to the i am very well known with the tea party patriots and the tea party movement that has gone on in this country. i have worked with the fair tax organization for over 10 years. i have worked with a number of other organizations. and then as part of my business career, i have been the keynote speaker at many conferences and conventions all over this country and even other parts of the world where people know herman cain as this business man who speaks on the topic of leadership. as a result, when a stop to think about it, my ground game had already started, and now we are simply building that. because i do believe that with a successful ground game, is successful grass-roots awareness, then it will be a lot easier to get the media attention. let me give you just one piece

of compelling information that we have seen. the tea party patriots held a national policy summit in phoenix about three weeks ago. there were about 2500 attendees. they did a straw poll, and they put all of the likely candidates, 19 to 20 of them, whether they had announced not announced, whether they officially had exploratory committees are not. herman cain came in first. the next closest person was six percentage points behind. that is actual data that my awareness with people on the ground is a lot greater than the visibility that i get sometimes with mainstream media. >> what role will lead to party activists -- it is not a single organization but a series of organizations, what role will the play in determining the nominee, and as of may 2012 different from 2008 to 1992, 2000, 1981?

>> absolutely. the answer to your second question is yes. the impact of the citizens' movement, as i called it, because it is the two-party movement. two-party patriots comity party express. it is a fair tax movement. all of these organizations, all the conservative organizations have mobilized their membership. more of them are being active. more of them are getting more accurate information about what is going on and what is not happening. so the difference in 2012 is that more and more people who have not been active at all in the past, even through their selected organizations or any sort of political event are much more active. when i was doing my radio show out of atlanta over the past couple of years, i would occasionally take my show on the road as part of what i call my take back out of government to are, where i would invite listeners to come out to a location that we will have set

up to do a live radio show. we would get large audiences, of to 1500 people, and i would always ask the question -- how many of you all have never been to any sort of take back our government political even before? 50% of the people consistently raise their hands. so the difference is going to be, number one, more people are active. and here will be the second thing that has changed the political dynamics. information. 10 to 15 years ago, people did not have access to accurate, correct information about what they were sometimes being told by people running for office. now they have a power of the internet. they have the power of talk radio, a conservative talk radio. and when people select the right blog, they got the power of the blocks.

i can think of an example that is a conservative leader, and people have learned to know that they can trust that. >> when you're confronted by a voter in new hampshire, iowa, south carolina, and they say it is between you and somebody else, and the other candidate has been tested. they have a track record. i know where they stand. you do not. had they been tested and what do you tell that a voter deciding between you and somebody else based on your track record? >> i say, first of all, ideologically, you're not going to find a whole football field with the difference between many of the candidates that are being mentioned as possible nominees for the republican nomination. so look for leadership. which of the candidates presents to you the greatest and strongest leadership based upon that record, based upon how they present themselves, because

leadership in the biggest, toughest jobs in the world is going to require someone who really has a grasp of problem solving, which i have used and successful been as people had used. make sure you're working on the right problem. make sure you set the right priorities. make sure that you surround yourself with the right people, strong people around you. and if you do that, you will put together plans that you can then execute. and then leading any entity, any business, or the united states of america after you do those four things, engage the people. >> running its business is very divert from running the government. >> yes, but it has one thing in common. when i ran businesses and my associates knew what we were trying to do and they bought

into the mission in at this strategy, they were much more likely to execute it effectively because they felt a part of it. take the same analogy to the american people. i am hearing every day from people, they feel left out of the process. they do not feel as if what is going on in washington, d.c., is in the people's best interest. this is why when i do those first four things effectively, i will be a president of the people, by the people, and for the people, which means i will spend as much time making sure they are engaged in the solutions we are proposing so they can put pressure on their members of congress. >> that was my next question. what about congress, and how you deal with a divided congress? we are seeing in it right now over the budget debate. past presidents, george w. bush, bill clinton, said they wanted to be united in changed the tone

in washington. they admit that they failed in that area. >> well, they're not herman cain, with all due respect. they both did a good job in a lot of respects, but my communications and my energy to connect people is were i will put a whole lot of effort. i think it was a former senator who said when they feel the heat, they will see the light. this is how you bring this congress together. and there have been recent examples that have demonstrated that. when the united states house of representatives passed the cap and trade and tax and killed well -- that is what i call it, representative michelle bodman said that by the time it zips through congress and they were getting ready, the democrats were getting ready to send it over to the senate for quick passage, before the american people knew what was going on, she was asked on a tv show what happened, and she said "the

phone lines melted." they felt so much heat, they got so much feedback from the citizens' movement that i have been talking about that they were reluctant to show that legislation down the throats of the american people, like president obama shoved obamacare down the throats of the american people. you know that the house and senate cannot agree on a compromise bill. they cannot even agree. democrats control the senate. democrats control the house. they cannot come to agreement. what did the president do? he used the power of the presidency to get members of the house of representatives to walk the plank and vote on the senate bill, and many of them paid for it on november 2. >> is barack obama a leader? >> no. he is a politician, but he's not a leader. and here are some examples as to

why he is not a leader. number one, no leadership model on the planet says surround yourself with 36 + czars, along with the agency heads an administrative head that you inherit as president. how are you going to manage a structure like that in order to be able to do the job? his leadership model was flawed from the beginning. secondly, leaders surround themselves with people that know more about certain subjects than they do. complement your areas of weakness if you want to call it that. the president appointed people that did not have as much business experience as he had, and he had none. you have seen this statistic.

7% of the president's appointees or cabinet members have actually worked in the private sector. 7%. the lowest in recent presidential history. so rather than surround himself with a lot of people who have worked in the private sector, even if it were only 50/50, that would have been better than 7% of the people. so this is why they have proposed, tried to pass, and implement policies that did not work. when my guiding principles all through business, and one of my guiding principles as president of the united states goes to the problem, go to the people closest to the problem. and they will more look -- they will more than likely have the better solution for how you should fix the problem. >> the state of the union today is -- >> i need a free fall. >> free fall? >> yes.

the state of the union is in freefall. the company has stalled. americans are not clear about what our foreign policy strategy is, with what is going on in the middle east. they cannot pass the fiscal year budget, and we're almost done with the fiscal year. the attention is being shifted constantly to social issues to distract from the lack of sound fiscal stimulative policy. the focus is on passing more legislation that we do not need or want on the part of the democrats, because they controlled the senate and the white house. the american people have a sense that the state of this union is in freefall. >> what about the house and the republicans in the house of representatives? >> the republicans in the house of representatives have slowed

the process down, but they cannot turn it this ship without also having control of the senate and control of the white house. they have slowed it down, but most people who understand how the legislative branch's work know that they can propose, they can push, but they cannot totally change it. and they have slowed the process down of what i call and what some other so-called radical socialization of this country. >> how do you reduce a $50 trillion debt, a debt that began under many modern presidents, increased significantly in under george w. bush in increased even further under barack obama -- how do you bring that down? >> first, truly have financial stimuli that is direct, lowering the top corporate tax rate. making the tax rates permanent.

because two years of extension is two years of uncertainty. take capital gains tax rate to zero. take the tax on repatriated profits to zero, such that nearly $1 trillion can come back into this economy that has been generated by multinational corporations in other parts of the world. provide a real payroll tax holiday for employees of 6.2%, all of it, and 6.2 spc% of the employer, all of it for a year. those five steps which really stimulate the economy because they differ from spending in that their direct stimulus, not indirect stimulus. composed mostly of spending. in phase two of that would be to totally replace the tax code with the fair tax, which is the national consumption tax. you've got to get the economy growing first. our economy grew last year%. the year before that, 2.1%. the chinese are growing at 10%.

it has been calculated that if we continue to grow at an anemic rate, the chinese will of the gdp as big as ours in 15 to 20 years. i consider that a national security threat. we about to get the economy going. on the other side, you start doing things to dramatically bring down the national debt every year consistently. for example, we have got to convert from an entitlement mentality to in a power but that -- to an empowerment mentality. any program that has an unfunded mandates on the state, we would change the rules. unfunded mandates means that government is trying to micromanage things from washington, d.c. we cannot. we must empower the states. we must empower businesses by improving and simplifying the regulatory environment. one of the reasons we do not have an effective energy independence strategy in this country is because of the regulatory environment.

so you empower the states, and power businesses, empower individuals with simpler, more fair tax codes, like a fair tax. we would not only been be creating jobs in america, we would be creating careers and whole new sectors. because we still have a lot of advantages that other countries do not have that they envy. whistle of the greatest infrastructure. we still have the greatest transportation capabilities. we still have some of the smartest, brightest people. we are still producing some of the greatest onto per infopreneurs'. -- some of the greatest entrepreneurs. so we are in the condition to get government out of the way. >> you have talked about ronald reagan in the past. but who else in american history or within the republican party has been a guiding force for herman cain?

>> former secretary jack kemp, who also was a congressman from new york. secretary kemp, he stirred constantly what i call that american spirit. despite the challenges that we faced, despite the snail's pace at which change takes place in washington, d.c. and the american people are hungry for steering that spirit of america while we fix our problems. abraham lincoln took over this nation in one of the toughest darkest hours in our history. he was not afraid of the challenge. he knew that he needed to keep this nation together.

not everybody loved him a. he had people fighting in working against him while he was trying to keep the nation together, but he did. because abraham lincoln had the ability to appeal to that american spirit the down in order to keep this nation together. he appealed to the goodness in the hearts of people in this country when he wrote the emancipation proclamation. not everybody agreed with freeing the slaves. he knew it was the right thing to do. the founders knew that it was the right thing to do, steve, when they set the bar high -- we hold these truths to be self- evident that all men are created equal. they were not even living up to that at that point. but they put the bar where they knew it had to be. that kind of stuff fuels this american spirit. >> you are a minority within the republican party. you look at the base of two votes democratic and republican. a vast majority of african-

americans over the democratic party. so have you been embraced by the gop? >> yes, i was embarrassed when i ran for the u.s. senate. when i say embraced, this simply means that they have treated me fairly. no favoritism or anything like that, but they treated me fairly. and they're treating me fairly now as i put my toe in the water in order to pursue the republican nomination. but more importantly is this new political dynamic that told you about, the citizens' movement, and the amount of factual information out there, it is also causing a lot of african- americans, a lot of black people, to look at not the republican party first but look at this guy herman cain who is a self-described american and black conservative. abc. >> hypothetical. herman cain and barack obama debating each other next fall. what would that say about the

state of america? >> that would say that most of the people in this country have gotten past color, and it would be about content and character. that is what it would say about the state of america. not all, but the majority. >> how did you go from working in the navy department to running restaurants? >> after rising up as a gs government civil service worker, as a mathematician with a minor in physics, i got bored after achieving one of my goals of becoming a gs13 mathematician because i had a financial goal very early in my career of making $20,000 a year. see, i grow up not having a lot of money. my parents worked hard. and after achieved the goal of making $20,000 a year, i needed a new challenge. i needed another girl.

i will never forget the day that my boss when i was working for the department of the navy called me in to say congratulations, you have gotten the new supervisor mathematician job that we have now created because of my performance, because i had gone back to school, and because of what they saw in me and some leadership ability. one of my first question is for him was, thank you, i am honored, but what does it pay? he said, $20,000 won the last $20,001 per year. it was realistic. but when you grow up not having a lot of money, you want to go on and do what you can do in america. and that is make your own american dream. over the years, my goals turned from just how much money i could

make to having an impact on the people around me. when i went to godfather's pizza in 1986, it was going bankrupt. people who just looked at the financials would say, well, maybe it is just another company that should go bankrupt. i saw 12,000 people jobs at stake. and as a result of being the president and ceo, i saw that achievement -- achieving the objective of keeping the company afloat so to drop of the people would not be looking for jobs, to me was much more important at whether or not we can make money. we did both. >> why would somebody choose polls barry or godfather's pizza versus another brand -- why would they choose pills very or of others. reverses another brand? >> consistency of the brain, quality of the brand, and the price competitive? if you have a superior quality product, you can command a

slightly higher premium price, but do not go crazy. because there is a limit at which the consumer will say, you have a better product, but i do not want to pay this much. american corporations spend a lot of time evaluating the strength of their brand and whether or not they can command a premium price. similarly, if you're looking at someone to become president of the united states of america -- >> you mean, my next question. >> i know your next question. you see, business people and is the stuff that you're right. people are ultimately going to act to look at all of the -- look, we already know the candidate is going to be for the democratic party. president barack obama. i do not think anybody is going to seriously tried to challenge him. that is out the history of either one of the major political parties. when you look at the field appointed to nominees for the republican party, people in

their own psychic, in their own way will be looking at the brand that each individual presents. and in this case, it is, does this person project confidence? does this person makes sense? are they offering some realistic ideas? and more importantly, do they feel as if they can trust this individual? because people ultimately want to follow a leader that they can believe in. that is what they're going to be looking for as they make this decision crosses over the next several months. >> you are married with how many children and grandchildren? chris bury for 42 years. two adult kids. 39 year-old elder. 32 year-old son. three grandkids. 12, 7, and 16 months. >> how did you meet your wife? >> through a mutual friend. the young lady that i went to high school with attended a

different church than i intended, but we went to the same high school. so this good friend of mine, her name was ruth, she was a classmate. we were not dating or anything, but she was a friend, and we did not live that far away from each other. so ruth, for about two years, kept saying to me, herman, i want you to meet my little sister. i said, ruth, thank you, but blind dates have not worked out for me very well. time goes by, herman, i want you to meet my little sister. and i am -- ruth, this just does not interest me. so one day ruth through a party, and i was a freshman in college. and little sister had graduated from high school, on her way to college. so she introduced me at the party. herman, this is the little

sister i have been trying to get you to meet for a long time. and i go -- is this the little sister i have been running away from [llaughs] i met one of the smartest, most attractive young ladies. i think it was love at first sight. >> how do you stay married for 42 years? >> do not try to change each other. this is what i tell young people all the time. know who you are marrying. know who they are. the things that you love about them. understand the things you do not like about them, but do not try to change them. that is when couples get in trouble. >> you had your own bout with cancer a couple years ago. when were you diagnosed, what was your treatment, and our you feeling today? >> i was diagnosed in 2006 with stage four cancer, which meant i had cancer in both mind colon and i liver.

that means it already metastasized to other parts of the body. 2006 est. four cancer. the first surgeon i consulted with said that is as bad as it can get. it did not make me feel good, but it is what it was. my treatment consisted of chemotherapy, double surgery to remove the affected parts. in my case, as my surgeon said, the one that did the surgery said, you are lucky with your cancer. and i said, had you get lucky with cancer? my tumor was isolated to a certain portion of my liver, so he could remove that portion in the could cultivate the remaining part of it to grow back, and it did. that was five years ago. then i had to do some more chemotherapy. so nearly five years of being totally cancer-free. i feel great. with only 30% chance of having made it. so i knew that god was smiling down on me, in his message was quite simplyhquiteerman, not

yet. >> you have aretino with your doctor? is there some sort of treatment? >> no treatment. tests. once a year, i get a cat scan, all of the blood tests. they do some more sophisticated blood tests when you have cancer. x-rays. i do that now on a regular basis. right after my initial treatment, i was going to this battery of tests every six months. it was so consistently good that my oncologist said that we do not need to do this every six months. now that i am coming up on my five-year anniversary, it will continue to be once every year i get these battery of tests to make sure does not reoccur, and it has not. >> where you go for ideas, information? what do you read, who you talk to? >> i read the bible to get ideas. i have a few very close friends that we will talk very

informally about things. as most people, i have some confidants that i can talk to about anything under the sun. you have got to have a few people that you can trust totally to be able to have those kind of conversations. i enjoy reading thomas' sell, people who put it in common- sense language in terms of ideas that we should be looking at, some things we should pursue. i read a lot of the papers that are published by the heritage foundation. i am not on their board. they do not pay me. they happen to be one of the greatest sources of accurate analysis, policy, and information we have in this country. there are some others, but i have got to tell you, i have known this person since the early 1990's when we served on the commission together, that was chaired by jack kemp, what

talked about earlier. he has been with a tremendous organization with a tremendous track record of solid policy analysis, solid information, that a lot of people are turning to in the want to get some good guidance. >> what ideas do you glean from the bible? >> first, do what is right. unfortunately, it too many people in washington, d.c., consider the political consequences for respect and sometimes lead them to doing things that may not be right. if you start with do what is right, treat people right, you're probably going to end up with a correct result in the end. but if you start out with what the political consequences, know what is the right thing to do. it was not right to shut obamacare down the throat of the

majority of the american people. polls have shown before he signed it that the majority of the american people that did not want that solution to the problem that he and the democrats supposedly were trying to solve. they wanted patient-centered, market-driven ideas. and they were right there in hr 3400, but a lot of people never heard of that. do what is right. >> what does your wife and kids think about this potential run? >> my wife things i am not, but she has said you have been nuts before when you have decided to do something that seemed against the odds. she and i were talking about -- my wife, thank the lord, has always been very supportive of all of my endeavors, because we have always had that kind of relationship. she has done things in her life

and career were she is always been supportive of my career, because we had an understanding that i would be the primary breadwinner. and we were talking about this whole presidential bid and i asked her, what scares you the most? i know this is something -- i never even considered this growing up. three years ago i never considered possibly running for president. she said the thing that scares her the most is that i might win. because she has seen me turn godfather's around against the odds, turn a region of burger king and around against the odds, take over a project when i became vice-president of information technology. i took a project that was behind schedule and over budget, and we finished the project ahead of schedule below budget.

she has been a part of my life, been a part of the challenges that i have faced, so her biggest fear is that i might win. my children, they, too, are used to dad taking on some incredible challenges. to quote my daughter when she was asked by a reporter many, many years ago -- i think she was still a teenager. she happened to be in the room when i was doing an interview. and the reporter turned to my daughter and said, what do you think you're about -- what you think about your dad with all this publicity and all this notoriety he he is getting? this is what i went to godfathers. lidar said, is just bad. as long as i can just be dad and his grandfather to my grandkids, life is good. >> let me conclude by asking about your potential rivals in this race. in a word or phrase, describe

your view of them. let's begin with mitt romney. >> formidable, businessman, but would have to wrestle with what has become labeled as romneycare. >>; t? >> and accomplished politician, an accomplished governor, articulate. but some people have said not very inspiring. >> haley barbour. >> dangerous, in a good way. haley barbour is one of the smartest governors, one of the

smartest of his shoulders. yes, he is a politician, the he is dangerous in a good way because he has been in washington. he said his goal of going back to mississippi and becoming governor, and he did. haley barbour is a very competent and very capable. i have a great amount of respect for him. i have known him for many, many years. he could be a force if he were to decide to run, because the depth of his contacts for -- as well as really understanding the process and able to connect with people. >> new kingsbridge, your friend. >> formidable. -- newt gingrich, your friend. >> formidable. one of the most intellectually sound thinkers on the planet. >> is his personal life a factor in this race? >> i do not think so. because i think people look at

the personal life history more previously than they do today. over the last several years while i was on the radio, i noticed the terminology coming from listeners where many of them have -- had gone from being concerned about the future of america to being fearful about the future of america. and in that regard, there was somebody who can help us get us back on the right track. >> sarah palin. >> very popular, tells it like it is, and she inspires a lot of people. >> humans and radio a couple times. you were on the radio when and how long? >> i was on the radio for five years. two years doing a weekend show, at the herman cain show. and three years, up until most recently, five nights a week out

of atlanta, georgia. >> and what is the hermanator? >> that is in a name that was given to me by members of the restaurant association when i was the chairman of the board back in the early 1990's when we were fighting hillarycare. as an officer of the national restaurant association, i became one of the primary spokespersons against hillarycare. so a gentlemen by the name of larry mccarthy of this to develop some of the commercials that we used to tell people the truth about this to wake people up. he tells the story of one night he was watching tv and the commercial that he had done with me in it representing the views of small businessmen had just run on his tv set, and then he was flipping the channels and saw the movie open "

terminator." that gave him the idea. he was excited about it. you tell the staff at the national restaurant association about this new nickname, and it stuck. >> finally, what is your process in actually deciding what -- whether you're going to run? sounds like you are running. >> i have put my toe in the water. it is now up to my neck. the feedback we have gone from people across this country, tens of thousands who are willing to volunteer, the response we have gone from people in terms of funding, the response that i have gone from my many visits to the state of texas, south carolina, new hampshire, as well as in what in terms of people connecting with my message, common-sense solutions, as i call it. those are the things that over the next several weeks we're going to take a good hard look at to see if we make the final decision to go forward.

so it will be within the next several weeks. could be five or six or less. >> herman cain, thank you very much for joining us. >> it has been my pleasure. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> more 2012 presidential politics now with mississippi governor and potential republican candidate, haley barbour a. he spoke recently at a fund- raising in iowa. he talked about the need for defense cuts to lure the national debt and lessons learned from the japanese nuclear power plant crisis. this is hosted by the iowa republican party. it is about 25 minutes. >> thank you very much. congratulations on this. it happened that i got to speak of the first state party event.

i tell people at home, this guy is going to be a first-rate state chairman. off to a pretty good start. i liked hearing these statistics. picked up a senate seat, house seat. i am a former county chairmen. i was county chairman of my counted twice. once for four years, once for six years. this is where elections are won, right here where the rubber meets the road. my hat's off to you great county chairman. thank you for the job you do. [applause] >> it is interesting that i would be here on the ides of march, march 15. but i am not going to have

anybody stand behind me. as long as i keep matt in front of me. i am really glad to be here for this kick off of the chairmen of serious speaker -- the chairman series speaker events. we're getting ready for some the very important. the 2012 election is going to be a watershed election in american history. matt did not go into all of my pedigree anshan not, but i dropped out of college in 1968 and ran 30 counties for nixon in the presidential campaign. i have been involved in every presidential campaign since. i told some of the leaders of the county committee today, in all of that time, until about two years ago, there was an expression statement that i had never heard made. however, every day, every week for the last year-and-a-half, i have heard people say this.

i am concerned my children and grandchildren are not going to inherit the same country that i inherited. i never heard that at the depths of watergate, the height of the war in vietnam. jimmy carter's administration, bill clinton's administration. but it is a reminder to us of the stakes of this election and what we need to be focused on. and that is a winning, winning in 2012. they say 50 years ago or more, conrad hilton, the great hotel magnate was on the ed sullivan show. maybe a couple of you all are old enough to remember and sullivan. maybe steve. one sunday night, 12 million american households tune dying into ed sullivan, and he calls up conrad hilton, a man who had created a new business, a luxury hotel chain, a business icon,

the bill gates of his day. ed sullivan looked at him and said, you can only tell the american people one thing, what would you tell them? conrad hilton at never hesitated. you said that the shower curtain inside the tub. [laughter] now there was a guy who knew what was important to him. and i am here to talk to you for a minute about what is important to me. we have an enormous election coming up in 2012, and as some of you know, i am thinking about being a candidate. i am is seriously considering that. i will not make a decision until the end of april. but i have thought about what we have to do, whether our candidate is haley barbour or whether our candidate is somebody else. we can look at the 2010 election and get a guidepost for 2012. why did we win an enormous victory in 2010?

because the election was about policy. the election was about the great issues facing the american people. [applause] here and that is right. when elections are about issues and public policies, it is good for republicans. because on most issues, most americans agree with us. and as we saw in this election, when independents voted for republican candidates, it was about public policy. because people look at what is happening in our country today -- why is our economy not recovering like it should? why is it recovering so much more slowly than from past recessions? why would we bring in new administration do we lose 7 million jobs in the first two years?

prices last month were just back to what the were in 2004. the gdp only went up 2.8% the last quarter of 2010. 1983, 1984, after a similarly deep recession, at this point the economy was roaring. why? well, i will tell you why. it is not because of a failure of business. it is not because of the failure of free enterprise. it is a failure of government policy. the policies of this administration are making it harder to grow our economy, and making it harder to create jobs in the united states. and pig an issue that you want to start -- taxes. the president, for two years, had hanging over the american economy his stated purpose of the largest tax increase in american history. he lost. no republican senator would vote

for it. he lost, and that was in december. yet, within a month that the state of the union address, the president reiterated, he still wanted the largest tax increase in american history. a few days later he came up with his budget for next year. $1.30 trillion of new taxes on the american economy. how are we going to grow the economy and create jobs if the government is going to take another $1.30 trillion of the economy? how our business is going to make decisions to expand, to hire more people, to invest when they have hanging over their heads that the president wants to hit them for $1.30 trillion that otherwise could go to capital investment, to more employees, to better pay, to better pensions? spending? you know, this administration

thinks government growth is the answer to economic growth. well, let me just tell you, bigger government means a smaller economy. let me just say that very directly. bigger government means a smaller private economy. because how can the private economy grow when government sucks all the money out? but that is what we have seen. the last two years, the first few years of the obama administration, they raised spending -- they spent $7 trillion, and we lost 7 million jobs. i guess we should be glad they did not spend $12 trillion, or we would have lost 12 million jobs. but their idea bad growing the government -- there idea that a growing the government is helping the economy is backwards, and it is wrong. you can tell we have got an

administration that there were there's nobody who ever signed the front side of a paycheck in their career. but it is not just taxes and spending. the gigantic deficits are a huge, huge drain on our economy and our chance for economic growth. do you know that from the constitutional convention in 1789 until president obama was inaugurated in january of 2009, and that 120-year time span, the american government ran up less debt in that 220 years than the obama administration budgets will do in 10 years? $13 trillion of debt in the next 10 years if obama's budget is

adopted. the news media talks about how he has moved to the middle and he got the message. well, whether the facts? the fact is, after he got the message, his budget proposes increasing spending to $3.80 trillion. he proposed increasing the deficit to $1.6 trillion in one year. can you imagine if your business revenue was 42% less than your expenditures? you could write a book about it. it would start at chapter 11. [laughter] [applause] in fact, the government cannot spend itself rich anymore than

your family can spend itself rich. but they seemed to have lost sight of that. that is why, as the chairman said, his little girl comes into the world under a dark ditch when debt -- under a huge debt that she and my grandchildren will be paying off when they are our age if we do not do something about it. if we do not turn the corner and turn itwe all understand the cag effect of better -- of federal spending and federal debt, every year you let things go in the wrong direction, it becomes much harder to get them back on track and get us back to normal. we know what needs to be done. we don't have a $1.6 trillion dollar debt because we tax too little. it is because we spent too much. if we're going to do something

about it, we have to cut spending. i was political director of the white house for ronald reagan when we were rebuilding the military. but let me tell you something. we can save money at the pentagon. anybody who thinks you cannot save money at the pentagon has never been to the pentagon. i can tell you, general, you know i am telling you right. we can save money on defense and if we republicans don't propose saving money on defense, we will have no credibility about anything else. it is smart, good, right, faithful to our campaign that our guys right now are trying to cut the non-defense discretionary budget. we are trying to cut it at an annual rate of about $100 billion a year. that is important, but it's a drop in the bucket. we are talking about a $1.6 trillion deficit.

you cannot deal with that much to deal with entitlements. we will have no credibility if we talk about getting control of the budget if we do not deal with entitlements. this is an area where the president is absolutely a wall. -- absolutely awol. he understands vividly what needs to be done and has chosen not to lead. without his leadership, we still need to deal with this, but it means the next president is going to have to have the courage to deal with entitlements spending in a way that protects our beneficiaries but does so without running up this unbelievable burnham on generations to come. the good news is that it can be done. -- unbelievable burden on

generations to come. if we do not have a president who's got the courage to tell the american people the truth, something i think the american people are prepared to hear, then we are not going to make the progress we need to make for your going to get our country back. taxes, spending, deficit, that, health care -- how do you expect employers to add employees when they have no idea because of obama care what the obligations and costs they are going to have for those employees. this is another example or the obama administration's policies are hurting the economy and making it harder to hire people rather than easier. energy policy -- this administration pause energy policy can be summarized in one sentence -- they want to drive

up the cost of energy so americans will use less of it. that is not energy policy. that's environmental policy. they think we will have less pollution if we use less energy. we will also have a much smaller economy. we americans for 400 years since the british landed at jamestown have been blessed with abundant affordable american energy. this administration is the first since i don't know when that does not have a policy focus on more american energy. but that's what our policy should be. more american energy. [applause] all of the above -- oil, gas, coal, nuclear, ethanol, a word probably foreign to many of your ears.

we have got to have all of the above and we will have them for the foreseeable future. we are not going to see cold a lot of the energy picture. we're not going to see oil, gas or nuclear. we have a lot to learn about what happened in japan and we need to learn and see what the things are that are similar to the way we do things in the united states and what is not similar. 20% of the electricity in the united states comes from nuclear. it's going to be that way for a long time and are many people including me that thinks its -- think it behooves us to increase that. this deal can be used for other purposes rather than just generating electricity. this is not as simple as the bp

oil spill was very clear for those of us close by that they cut corners. when they were shutting in the well, they did not follow the normal standards or protocols. we drilled 31,000 oil wells in the gulf of mexico in the last 50 years and nothing vaguely similar to this had ever happened before. the reason is because they did not do what everybody knows you are supposed to do. we do not know what happened in japan. we do not know enough about the systems and what has worked and what has failed, but we need to study and learn and make sure we continue to have safe, reliable, clean nuclear energy in the united states. let me come to a conclusion by saying this -- we republicans need to be careful as we talk about cutting spending and talk about not raising taxes.

in my view, i would propose cutting taxes. today, in the world, we have a global battle for capital. yet because of our mistake in tax code, we have one trillion dollars of u.s. money stranded and overseas belonging to our multi natural -- multinational corporations and its sitting. it's either going to sit there are be invested in foreign economies in europe, asia and other countries. we need to repatriate that money and tell companies to bring it home tax-free. that money is not coming home. we need that money to come home to build new facilities and invests in new technologies and

hire more people in america, not overseas. that kind of tax policy -- that a tax policy we need to follow. at the same time, i think it is way overdue that we join most of the other advanced nations in the world, our competitors, by cutting the corporate income-tax in half. [applause] as almost every other country has done in the last 10 years. on tax policy where the left wants to raise taxes, we need to make those tax cuts. why? because we want to grow the economy. we want to add jobs for americans. it is not satisfactory that we are not doing anything about the 7 million americans who lost their jobs in the first two years of the obama administration.

but we do have to be careful that people understand cutting spending will be good for economic growth. cutting taxes will be good for job creation. getting rid of obama care will make it more likely people will get higher. having a more american energy policy will help our economy grow in america. we need for people to understand we're not just interested in cutting spending or reforming entitlements just for the sake of doing so. they need to understand this will help us achieve what needs to be achieved. fred smith is the founder and ceo of federal express. he has a great saying. he says the main thing is to

keep the main thing the main thing. the american people need to understand from our party, from conservatives, that the main thing is to grow our economy and put people back to work. economic growth and job creation is what we consider the first national priority and these other things are means to that end. we're not trying to cut spending for the sake of cutting spending. we are trying to do so so the private economy can have more money. we'll understand the difference between our philosophy and the philosophy of the obama administration. president obama has unlimited face in limitless government.

we all know our founding fathers gave us a limited government so that we, the market place, free enterprise, entrepreneurial americans, small business people, farmers, we can grow our economy, we can hire people, we can make profits, we can make america of the kind of dynamic economy that it has been for so much of our lifetime. and at the private sector has to do that. the private economy as well we want to grow, not the government. [applause] i close by saying that i've

spent a few minutes talking about public policy. the reason is i think the next election must be about public policy. if it is about public policy and the results would come from those policies, we will win the elections. the american people have looked at obama's policies and i know those policies have been bad for the economy, job creation, health care in america and they have been bad for the kind of energy policy we need to grow. but it is not enough in presidential election just to say what is wrong with the other guy. we have to make our proposals about what we would do that to grow the economy. what we would do to put people back to work and give people in iowa and in america the chance for better paying, hire skilled jobs that result in careers, not just a short-term job.

that is our obligation. if we meet it, we will win this election. if we need it, steve's young family here, these young people at steve's table will have a far, far better chance to enjoy what we have enjoyed, the greatest con most exceptional compost prosperous nation, society and culture ever imagine on the face of the earth. but we have to do what it takes to be sure these young people get that opportunity. we can never let it come to pass that our children and grandchildren don't inherit the same country we inherited.

thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> as the nato operation in libya continues, we will get an update from general carter ham live by satellite from his headquarters in germany. we will bring you coverage beginning at noon eastern on c- span. we'll also that the latest on the president's trip to latin america today. mark toner will brief reporters at 1:00 eastern. president obama will continue his latin-american trip this week. today, he will speak from santiago, chile. live coverage of that starts at

3:20 eastern. >> tonight, marking the eighth anniversary of the department of homeland security with former secretaries tom ridge and michael chertoff. they will discuss the nature of threats facing the country and what they miss most about the job. >> people have asked me do i miss being a secretary and to a certain extent, i say yes. working with people i came to trust and a buyer because of those people and their hard work, and a those early months, it was intense and it's a great cause. i miss not knowing. not that everything we read it this morning was something you want to run home and talk to the family and kids about, but you missed not knowing. >> secretaries tom ridge, a cultured off, and the janet

napolitano discuss the department of homeland security tonight on c-span. >> up next, john sununu, former new hampshire governor and former white house chief of staff spoke wednesday night at a dinner in massachusetts. he talked about the economy, energy, foreign-policy, leadership and the 2012 presidential election. his remarks last about 45 minutes. [applause] >> i am the old and ancient former governor, not former senator. i make that distinction because i made -- i overheard remarks earlier somebody said doesn't the senator looked like hell? [laughter]

when i heard they wanted me to come and talk to you, i tried to identify the texture of the audience we would have so i could at least start with some kind of story to make a connection, the way everybody makes these speeches likes to find an antidote to make a connection. they told me there are a lot of lawyers, accountants and technical people. so i went back and racked my brain and i remembered an old, old story. of thee story of the ceo most powerful company in the world. he has a very critical question he has to ask. he calls in his chief engineer, calls in as chief counsel and chief accountant. he says gentleman, i have a dilemma. i need an answer to a very important question.

he turns to the engineer and says here is the question -- how much is two and two. the engineer says that's very easy. it's for. it has always been for. he's not satisfied with that and turns to his chief counsel, a lawyer and says how much as two and two? his lawyer says there are certain jurisdictions in which an approximation close to 3.9 or 4 is acceptable and others, and it's not accepted, we will have to go out and do a study and it will probably cost $600,000. he says that's not what i need. so he turns to his accountant, are cpa will enjoy this. he says how much is to end to? the count of leaps up, goes

unlocks the door, pulled the shade down, opened the drawer, puts the phone in to the torrent shots the drawer, grabs the ceo, takes into the corner and says how much do you want it to be? [laughter] that has absolutely nothing to do with what i'm going to talk to you about tonight. i thought i would come and talk to you a little bit about what is happening in this country right now. i think if you are like me, like anybody in my family, like any but the table you are at, you have a little bit more anxious than you used to think you were going to have at this stage in life about what is going on in our nation and what is going on around the world.

i was talking to someone the other day and i said i hate to say this, but i'm actually nostalgic for the old days. what was a superpower confrontation with the u.s. on one side and the soviet union on the other side, each one with their allies. on every issue, we knew what the sides were. besides never changed. it was the u.s., great britain, france over here and the soviet union and her allies here, whether with a trade issue, international conflict, what ever was, the lines were drawn. today, on every issue, you have to build a new coalition. you have to go out and beg your friends quite often to be part of it. it is not an easy world. it is much more complicated that was when the soviet union was the soviet union. that uncertainty, that turmoil,

that lack of stability seems to be part of the process not only internationally, but within our own country. hadoesn't mean we have not economic turmoil before. but we seem to be going through it now with a lot of unrest. what i would like to do tonight is talk to you a little about the economy, a little bit about energy because it's very important part of what we're seeing on television every night now, and talk to you a little bit about what is happening around the world or a least in a couple of places around the world and how all of those pieces come together and are reflected in what we might call the agenda for 2012, the political agenda for 2012. first of all, we take a look at the economy.

we certainly came through very difficult time. for whatever reason, the economic system built up within itself a bubble, bubbles always seemed to be the cause of economic problems, whether a real estate bubble, the internet bubble, but the real estate bubble was last time. mother nature, particularly the economic side of mother nature has an amazing way of bringing things back to reality. quite often, that collapse is rather calamitous. it certainly was at the end of 2007 and 2008 and 2009. we had a real problem. we will not debate whether or not we are in favor of things like tarp or whether or not in those critical days at the end

of 2008, whether we were on one side or the other. the fact is we went through process, it stemmed the fiscal bleeding and then we started in 2009, 2010 and has become an to the beginning of 2011, the challenge of trying to rebuild. one of the things done by the current president, and he had not only power in the white house but control of the house and senate, they decided to have a strategy of spending money. it's important to understand how much money was spent. it's important to try to identify what impact that money had. to try to get a handle on how we then reversed the spending trend as any family would have to do if it was through that same kind of cycle or any

business would have to do and retrench. because what -- because retrench we must. nobody now is denying the fact we ought to be cutting spending. but we ought to at least identify how serious the problem is. interesting number -- the last fiscal year before this administration came into power, we spend $2.9 trillion. the year after that, when they came into power and put the budget together and went through the process of implementing their strategy of stimulus, we were spending $3.9 trillion dollars. a one-third increase. you can sustain one-third increases for small businesses,

but i doubt you will find a major business in the country that can tell you in one year they can increase by one-third and not feel any pain. we feel pain. we have increased our national debt tremendously. luckily for about $eight trillion dollars to close to $13 trillion. a 33% increase in expenditure rate. the strategy some people are suggesting to deal with that is to freeze it at a 33% increase and go from there. it does not work. the arithmetic is a hard taskmaster. you cannot attend the numbers

are not there. but the problem is not just that the federal level. look around the states, slightly different order of magnitude, but for each and every one of them, virtually each and every one of them, a very similar problem. here in massachusetts, as i understand it, the problem at the state budget level is between $2,000,000,000.- 1294967773 dollars. in new hampshire, it's almost a billion dollars. for all of the states -- it's between $2 billion and $3 billion. that's the easy part of the challenge for the states. the states have a second problem. of pensionproblem benefits at retirement obligations. in new hampshire, the numbers i know the best, we have almost a

billion dollars of problem in the budget. we have a pension in which the pension liabilities have an unfunded liability of 3.5 billion to $4 billion. that's what people talk about having to fix, but that's not all the problem. i learned a long time ago if you want to find out the fiscal condition of a company or city, town, or state, the best place to find the real answers is to go back and look at their bond statements. the statements they have to put together when they go out to borrow. i started looking at the new hampshire bonds statements about one year ago and i found a section called retirement obligations. sure enough, they talked about the pension liability of $3.5

billion to $4 billion. then i read the paragraph below and there were two other liabilities. one is health-care obligations to retirees. that is not included in the number you are hearing for each of your states. in new hampshire, there is another almost billion dollars in health-care obligations. but that's not the end of the issue. there is another obligation called poeb -- other post employment benefits. in new hampshire, that's another $2.5 billion. so instead of a $3.5 billion liability as people acknowledge in the press, it is a $7 billion liability. instead of california having a

$114 billion liability, i suspect if you look at their bonds statement, you will find its close to a quarter of a billion dollars. -- a quarter of a trillion, unbelievable. this is what we face as a country. the point is, as all of you know, the sooner we get to fixing these issues, the easier it will be in the long run. it will not be easy, but it will be easier. that is part of the challenge. yes, we are watching television and people are being accused of being so heartless and cruel, so tough. trying to cut back and address some of these issues. i suggest to you that the most important thing you can do to

help people do what they have to do responsibly is not to remain silent, but to provide encouragement to those who want to deal constructively with these issues. quite often when i speak, someone will stand up in the back of the room and raise their hand. they're usually the ones who seem the most agitated. so i will call on them. they will say governor, when are the politicians in this country going have the guts to make the good, hard decisions that need to be made? my answer is you think in that question you have identified the political figures as the ones who have to do the right thing. but in fact, if you think about it, your real condemnation in

that question is a condemnation of us because why, in a democracy, should be making the right decision be a hard decision? it is up to us to create a climate in which the right decisions are easy decisions. we have not done a good job of doing that over time. the second issue i want to address is energy. favorite line on all the talking head shows and by all the political figures to do not know one part of their anatomy from their elbow, c-span is here -- they love to say this country has no energy policy. in a way, they are right.

this country has no energy policy because the right energy policy is not politically correct. it is an easy thing if anybody understands energy to put an energy policy together that is both effective and doable. some people talk about. they talk about as the all of the above choice. we need coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, large scale hydro, you want to throw wind and solar in, fine, but don't think they are the magic that is the solution. you need it all. most of all are the traditional sources. that is the right energy policy. but it is not the politically correct one. it's not the one the media likes. it's not the one we like to

think will save us from hard aspect and hard investment and hard issues. i know that nuclear is taking a tough wrap this week with what is happening in japan. i personally think it will be -- it will work its way out there and it will end up with not as diary set of consequences. i could be wrong, but i don't think there will be a dire set of consequences. if that happens to happen, if the japanese and up fixing this without any serious injury or loss of life, then the important message to the world will be exactly the opposite of what the media is trying to make it now. it will be that the energy source can withstand even a nine. go -- a ninth leg 0 earthquake -- a 9.0 earthquake.

we have to have the courage to create the climate or the correct policy becomes an easy policy rather than the wrong policy being politically correct. it is up to us. we have the responsibility. the third thing i like to talk about before get into the political side of politics is a little bit of what is going on around world. -- going on around the world. we watched with great -- we watched with amazement what was going on in egypt. the activities and the young people and the capacity to use twitter and facebook to gather crowds and protest the regime there were not very happy with. and with good reason.

we stand and cheered that. then we cheered what began to happen in libya. we even gave strong encouragement to the government in libya and gave the people who were beginning to literally fight. egypt was more peaceful. in libya, they were shooting at each other. civil war. we gave encouragement to the protesters. then we did nothing. we did nothing. we have done nothing. how unconscionable to give people the impression that we would provide some support. then stand back and let what is happening happen there. but let me get back to the larger point. we watched what happened in egypt and we're watching what happened in libya. we see issues like this taking

place in bahrain and in yemen and we are tempted to be sitting at home cheering it on. but the fact this we have no idea what will come next. no idea at all. how do we know even the people who were protesting in that country will be better off with what comes next? how do we know the world will be better off with what comes next? we pressed for democratic elections in palestine and look what happened -- have lost one. -- hamas won. we certainly cannot be happy with that result. it's one thing to have democracy as a stimulating philosophy of what we would like

to see take place around the world. it's important to help people get there eventually, but i am not sure the most responsible thing is to hope for democracy by dramatic action. i see those three aspects being critical as we try to sit down and decide amongst ourselves what we would like to happen in this country in the next few years, what we would like to happen real-world in the next few years, who we want to be the leader of this nation as we go through the 2012 process to decide who should be in charge. we have an incumbent in the white house. he is certainly one choice. then the republican party,

which jews and then we as a nation will sit down and select. let me talk a little bit to you -- i apologize if this has a slightly partisan flavor, but it's almost impossible for anyone to give you an honest expression of their opinion without hinting at a little. -- without tinting it a little. i think there is a huge leadership void in the world. specifically a leadership void in this country. i was talking with some friends from around the world the other day, i had a nice little lunch with about four countries represented. very different opinions on what is going on, but the one thing we agreed on is that there is a

really big difference in our opinions at least on the quality of world leadership today. no margaret thatcher's, no ronald reagan, no people who are able to take a look at the macro problems out there, define a set of positions and work hard to implement them and make things better. i offered my opinion, that i think the closest thing that approach is that style of leadership is a vladimir putin in russia. other than that, i don't see any leadership. i don't see any defining philosophies. i don't see any commitment to moving in a certain direction, ca capacity to bring things together. i don't see anyone there who can

help reshape the world in the direction i suspect we would all like to be reshaped. i think that is one of the questions we must ask ourselves and i'm very much aware of the fact that margaret thatcher was not margaret thatcher until she was elected. helmut kohl was not helical until after he took office. and that ronald reagan was not ronald reagan until he became president. i accept that. but we at least have to look for people that give us hope. we ought not to stick with people who have demonstrated they cannot. it is too critical. it is too critical. our economy is at a tipping edge. what is going on around the world is seriously in turmoil. this is not easy times we all thought we would have after the

soviet union collapsed. remember those days of the -- days of euphoria? the days of superpower conflict are over. happy days are here again. it did not work out. let me talk a little bit about what i think it's going to happen as a sequence of events politically as we move to 2012 and talk about the cast of characters that will come knocking on your doors asking you to support them. you don't live in new hampshire, they will knock on your doors, you will see them on television. 2012 -- the two parties, republican and democrat have tried to make this a little more orderly than that used to be. the two national committees, the democratic national committee and the republican national committee have both adopted a set of rules that are virtually the same, that have set aside the month of february, 2012, as

a time in which nevada, iowa, new hampshire and south carolina are allowed to go first in their delegate selection process and then all other states can start march 1st and schedule themselves in. of course needed the democratic national committee nor republican national committee really have much power. so there are rumblings. other states think they ought to be entitled to go early. so i suspect we will see particularly florida, michigan and texas making noises as if they would like to go in february or even january. when they ask me as the former governor of new hampshire and i went back to be the state

chairman to clean the rascals out last year, which we did, they asked me what will happen if these states start jockeying? the one advantage we have in new hampshire is our secretary of state is empowered to move our primary as far forward as he has to in order to keep it first in the nation primary. that reminds me of a story, when i was governor a southern governor i will not name here out of courtesy to him came into my office when i was governor and as a courtesy visit, to tell me he was going to run for president, he would be coming to new hampshire for the primary and he wanted me to know that. what started off as a courtesy visit, he started to get heated and started showing how angry he was that new hampshire somehow

was allowed to have the first in the nation primary. he told me he was going to go back to his state of florida -- i let a little out of the bag -- see how long it takes you to google that -- he would go back to florida and florida would move their date forward and they would end up ahead of us. and i said you can go back and change the law but our secretary of state has tremendous powers in new hampshire and he will keep moving it forward. he said it will move it so far forward that there will be no room left to move new hampshire forward. so i turned to him and somehow i kept a straight face and said the governor, then we will just put in provision be of the law. he said what is provision b? i said the law permits under

dire circumstances such as that for the governor of new hampshire to do -- to declare the primary has already been held and pick the winner. he really went down to the secretary of state's office and asked for provision b. i don't know if we can use that i suspect there will be real jockeying and it will be fun to watch how the process works out. there will be early voting, probably in january, and it could even be, if people get ridiculous, as early as december. with that in mind, i think you are going to find people who have hoped they did not have to commit send beginning to commit quickly over the next few weeks. i do not know who is going to be in and who is not, you know the

list of suspects. certainly the former governor of massachusetts will be a candidate, the former governor of minnesota will probably be a candidate, haley barbour will probably be a candidate, there's a good chance mitch daniels will be a candidate, john had spent of colorado says he will be a candidate, new to gingrich has suggested he might be a candidate. then we have the huckabees, palins and bachmans. i don't think it will be that many. i think that's too many. people have asked me my personal preference. i have a terribly huge bias toward governors or former governors.

i have four governors who are friends one way or another. i suspect my personal preference will probably go to one of them. i was asked the other day by the press about the former governor of utah, jon huntsman. i guess i gave an answer the got a lot of headlines. i said he was obama's ambassador to china. why would the republican party nominate an obamaite? i really don't understand that process. they asked me about speaker gingrich. at least for me it was disturbing to see newt gingrich sitting there with nancy pelosi talking about a carbon tax. i think that's going to be a big problem for him if he chooses to run.

i suspect all the others are going to find out is easier to be brash and get headlines when you are not a candidate without responsibility and if you want to read to -- you want to run for president, you have to speak with discipline and focus, clarity on issues and focus on direction. i think it is going to be a very important race. i think there is a huge responsibility on the part of republicans and i urge republicans across the country to understand they are probably going to be picking the next president. i think president obama has serious problems. i think the last two weeks have been his worst two weeks, whether he understands it or not. i think he underestimates the

impact on people of what has appeared to be is in difference over the last few days to traumatic issues around world. i think his encouragement to the protest in libya and that a failure to provide any leadership or action when the europeans were begging us to take a leadership position is going to be a serious problem. and i think that continued coolness which became clearly in difference as we watched what was going on in japan is going to hurt him. and the fact that at least from what i have seen in the press, that he may be going to mardi gras this weekend while these issues are still critical creates a huge political

problem. i don't understand it. i served a president that took these issues seriously. i served a president who understood leadership comes from not only putting a policy out and finding it and urging the rest of the world to support us, but it was also reflected in the body language of presidency. this president's body language the last two weeks has been, in my opinion, absolutely not presidential. these are critical times. everybody here has their own particular political perspective. i would suspect at least half of view think i'm a horse's ass for everything i've just told you. but the fact is i like you to go home and think about them because they are real issues.

they are real defining aspect of leadership. we have a role to lead the rest of the world, even though there are some in washington who would like to suggest we're just another one of the boys or girls. these are critical times for our country. economics matters. foreign-policy matters. america's capacity to lead matters. experience matters. why do i favor governors? i favor governors because they have been in the firing line of a chief executive of a large public entity and had to make decisions in the public domain. that experience is important. so i urge you as we go through

the next 11 or 12 months, it might get shortened by a process, but about 11 or 12 months, where we as citizens are called on to make important choices. we have to decide, we will support. -- we have to decide who we will support. i is ascii take time to think about the serious parts of the decision. the decision should be based on philosophy, perspective, experience, it should be based on an understanding of what the responsibility of the job is. if you do that, i suspect the country, no matter where you come down as an individual, if we all do that and go to the process, i suspect the country will be a bit better off than if we fail to do our homework.

you are very nice to let me come down and visit with you. thank you very much. i will either take questions or go away quietly, which are you prefer. thank you. [applause] questions? if you prefer, i will look so you can ask anonymously. the gentleman in the back. the gray-haired gentleman in the back. >> you talk about libya and the conflict that is going on there and the military image of that united states is our country as a superpower and we're just getting out of iraq and now we are in afghanistan. we have spent costly lives which

we can never replace. our young people for a just cause, i hope, but the financial aspect -- we spent billions and billions of dollars on those two wars. i don't find it justifiable to go into libya and give them a no-fly zone like they want because if the european -- the europeans want to do it, let them do it. why did we always have to carry the whole burden of the world? we are financially broke. we can only do it so much. we give them a nuclear umbrella in europe and asia and protect them in that respect. let them go and do it and save our lives and money. >> i was not suggesting we have to get actively involved in order to support it. i think the europeans were so strong on at that probably if we had encouraged them, they would have gone to take out runways to keep the planes down. that would have been an

important things. if we had joined europeans in recognition of the opposition and of failing to recognize and merely saying gaddafi must go, we would have provided a coalescing around leadership and that is what gives opposition's great strength. there is a lot of things we could have done besides just saying keep doing what you are doing. those are the kinds of things i think could have had a significant impact. i think we had moved quicker and earlier with encouragement instead of waiting until where we are now, it would have made a big difference. lose our aaag to bond rating. are you fearful of that? the nation. >> i'm not as afraid of that as others are. i really do think our economic system is the strongest. i really do think we will fix

the debt problem. i really do think we will demonstrate the capacity to have fiscal discipline. we have had this kind of a problem before. one of the reasons 1991 george herbert walker bush, the bush i was chief of staff for, one of the reasons we had to have a five-year budget plan, the very controversial budget plan we finally agree on, was that the rest of the world was hinting that they may not continue to buy treasuries if we did not get a multi-year plan. when push comes to shove, i think we will be smart enough to fix it, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be working awfully hard and providing encouragement to fix it in the right direction. thank you for asking anyone else -- thank you for asking. anyone else? >> in your opinion, is the

answer to the pension problem facing the states, what is happening is leigh wisconsin or is there something in between that can be done? >> i think the most important thing the states can do is negotiate with their pensioners a movement from a defined benefit plans to a defined contribution structure. negotiated. there are contractual obligations to the pensioners. but i do think the most important thing we can do is provide the political support and encouragement to those who are trying to do that so that people don't come to the table and say we're not yielding anything. the worst thing in the world as for the pensioners -- the worst thing in the world for the pensioners is for these plans not to be fixed. that kind of transition is an important part of it. there are too great studies that have been put together -- all lot of great studies that have been put together.

utah has made some movement in that direction. those are the kinds of solutions. i think the general objective of what has made headlines in the last week or two are the right objectives. i would like to see a process in which there was more negotiation and less confrontation. it is up to us to stimulate the difference. >> first, thank you for showing up tonight and speaking to us. >> it's a tough crowd. >> my question is, there are many problems for us to face in the world and i look at iran as one of the toughest in the long term. what is your opinion of how the united states should be dealing with this moving forward? >> i think again, when iran had

its internal unrest a little over a year ago, i think we failed to do the right thing. there are lots of things we can do to help things coalesced internally. we cannot do it in such a way that people start getting killed for no reason, but we can provide support in a number of ways. i think our allies were encouraging us to take a lead and we did not. >> we will leave the last couple of minutes of this event to go live now to the pentagon for a briefing on the military coalition in libya. he is the commander of u.s. africa command and will be live from satellite from his headquarters in germany. >> he assumed command on the ninth of march and it is commanding u.s. military support for international enforcement for international enforcement of